Originally posted by CorajudoYou are not supposed to keep all your money in one stock, no matter its performance. Period. Again, risk vs. return. Let's keep things in perspective. In 1999 and 2000, Enron stock rose by 56 and 87(!) percent, respectively. In comparison, the Dow increased 20% and then fell 10% in those two years. Its stock price was 70 times earnings; extremely high (suggesting overvalue). This is in no way sustainable.

You're still comparing apples to oranges. This was not a case of a company having a really high stock price at one point because business was good, then later on, business went down & took the stock with it. If all these people had lost their money because of that, I would be right there with you. But that's not what happened with Enron. I dont know why you keep bringing this up. "Risk vs. Return" simply does not apply when you're being lied to.

Twenty to thirty percent of a portfolio in one stock, or whatever you think is a reasonable amount, can still be *a lot* of money and, depending on individual circumstances, can still have a horrible, immeasurable impact on someone's life.

And even if not, who cares? The reason this whole mess is just that (a mess) isn't just because some peoples' investments wound up hurting them. This is news because they were *lied to about billions of dollars.*

Assuming based on your posts that you have a stock portfolio of your own, if whatever stock you have the most invested in goes the way of Enron, are you not going to be upset and demand justice because you were lucky enough to have other stocks? Of course not, don't be ridiculous. The *only* issue here is that the stockholders were lied to, and paid dearly for it. Why they were unable to take that hit just doesn't matter.

And on another note, not all the people hurt in this have the sound financial knowledge you seem to think you possess. Part of that is because of the corrupt investment advising procedure described above, and part is because they actually had (*gasp*) trust in a big, twisted corporation. Maybe now people won't make that deadly mistake again, but in the meantime the Enron victims' plight couldn't be further from their own fault.

And I have to ask, if your sympathy for these victims is lessened because of their ignorance, does that mean you feel a little sorry for the Enron crooks for being blamed for something that you think isn't entirely their fault?

I think the point should be made that not only did Enron lie about the value of their company, they also actually encouraged their employees to put all of their 401k's into Enron stock, at least that's my understanding. Ethically, they should have actually been discouraging that (and IMHO, actually cap the amount of company stock each employee could own to force at least a little diversification into the 401k).

Had Enron management explained to the employees that putting all their eggs into one basket is a really bad idea, and had employees ignored that advice and did it anyway, I would be more with you Corajudo. Now there is certainly a small part that says that ANYONE should do a little research before investing anything into any sort of plan. But due to the fact that the company not only did not properly educate employees, but also actually passed on bad advice, I mostly blame them.

The Bored are already here. Idle hands are the devil's workshop. And no... we won't kill dolphins. But koalas are fair game.

Exactly. Not everyone has a Masters in economics. Employees sank their investment into Enron based upon bad advice and the company outright LYING to them. To apportion any amounth of blame to them is really, really unfair. Not everyone can be a financial wiz. Many have to rely on advice from analysts and the honesty of their employers. And in this case those people were horribly let down.

To those who say people wouldn't look; they wouldn't be interested; they're too complacent, indifferent and insulated, I can only reply: There is, in one reporter's opinion, considerable evidence against that contention. But even if they are right, what have they got to lose? Because if they are right, and this instrument is good for nothing but to entertain, amuse and insulate, then the tube is flickering now and we will soon see that the whole struggle is lost. This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires, and lights, in a box.-Edward R. Murrow

I tried to make this as clear as possible but obviously failed. In every post I said that I do have sympathy for the stockholders and that they are victims. I only specifically referred to stockholders who put 100% of their savings into Enron. I think they shoulder some of the blame because they took that risk. But, again, the stockholders are victims.

And, if I lost 20% of all my savings because I had put it in Enron or Worldcom, of course I'd be pissed at Lay, Skilling, et al. But, if had put 100% into one company, I'd mostly be pissed at myself because that is a stupid and greedy thing to do.

Originally posted by TheBucsFanAnd I have to ask, if your sympathy for these victims is lessened because of their ignorance, does that mean you feel a little sorry for the Enron crooks for being blamed for something that you think isn't entirely their fault?

(edited by TheBucsFan on 26.5.06 1938)

Find this in my post before putting that kind of garbage in my mouth. And, in case you need this in writing: I have no sympathy for any of the Enron crooks and think they deserve every shred of blame. If Lay or Skilling ever step foot outside of prison, it's too soon. Is that clear enough for you?

Now there is certainly a small part that says that ANYONE should do a little research before investing anything into any sort of plan. But due to the fact that the company not only did not properly educate employees, but also actually passed on bad advice, I mostly blame them.

Exactly. Most of the blame goes to the company. But anyone who put every last penny into Enron does have some personal responsibility for the decisions they made.

(edited by Corajudo on 29.5.06 0545)"Teach children that they have great potential because they are human." -Warrior

Originally posted by TheBucsFanAnd I have to ask, if your sympathy for these victims is lessened because of their ignorance, does that mean you feel a little sorry for the Enron crooks for being blamed for something that you think isn't entirely their fault?

(edited by TheBucsFan on 26.5.06 1938)

Find this in my post before putting that kind of garbage in my mouth.

Originally posted by CorajudoLastly, not to be an ass (which usually means I'm about to be one), but I have very limited sympathy for the people who lost their life savings because they put their entire 401k and investments and everything into Enron stock. These people were greedy and deserve much less sympathy.

Do I win a prize?

Also, "Greedy?" Are you being serious? I don't understand why it's "greedy" to invest a lot of money in Enron, but not greedy to invest 20 percent as much in each of five companies. In the end, you're looking for what makes you the most money, regardless of where you invest it. That's what makes it an investment. Greedy? Wow.

In that quote, I fail to see where I stated that '[I] feel a little sorry for the Enron crooks for being blamed for something that [I] think isn't entirely their fault.' Kindly point that out.

Also, "Greedy?" Are you being serious? I don't understand why it's "greedy" to invest a lot of money in Enron, but not greedy to invest 20 percent as much in each of five companies. In the end, you're looking for what makes you the most money, regardless of where you invest it. That's what makes it an investment. Greedy? Wow.

Investing 100% of your money in one stock isn't investment. It's gambling. Investing 20% in five different stocks is only slightly more intelligent. Investing? Wow.

"Teach children that they have great potential because they are human." -Warrior

Originally posted by CorajudoIn that quote, I fail to see where I stated that '[I] feel a little sorry for the Enron crooks for being blamed for something that [I] think isn't entirely their fault.' Kindly point that out.

You're right; you didn't say that. Nor did I claim you did. I asked a question because it would seem to me that thinking the victims deserve part of the blame is the same as thinking the crooks don't deserve all of it. And I guess you said that's not the case (although you did not really explain how the victims take some of the blame, while the crooks take all of it; 100 percent of the blame + somewhere under 100 percent of the blame = more than 100 percent of the blame; and if the bad guys don't deserve 100 percent of the blame, shouldn't we feel bad for them being scapegoats?). Glad we got that straightened out!

This is bad for a lot of people. Mainly the thousands of truckers that would pick those loads up at the 20 mile radius. I unload trucks for a living and these things must be barely passing inspections as it is.